The only thing that stops the dust is the rain. It’s a sweet reprieve, but there is no middle ground. The land is either as dry as the Betty Ford clinic, or as wet as the ocean floor. Everything can be seen from the ridge overlooking Armadillo as John Marston gently bounces along atop...

Everyone who plays Xcom has their stories about that lone trooper that proved to be an ultimate badass, either by carving their way through everything in their way, or by coming in and saving everyone at the right moment, or just pulls off unbelievably lucky shots despite all odds.

For example, my younger brother had Minh Kim, named after the Gears of War character, who only ever seemed to hit his target when he really needed Kim to hit. The guy would miss 65% success shots regularly, but when Kim needed to score a kill or a trooper would be killed, Kim'd always hit his mark, often with a crit too._________________

JCD wrote:

BTW: Doom is better than Halo, but that doesn't count. That's like God kicking the f*ck out of an eight year old in a bareknuckle boxing match.

Xcom is a really cool game and perhaps a frustrating one. I spent a lot of time coming up with names for my troops only to loose most of them fairly early. I eventually gave up, but mostly because the game started out a bit slow. Having said that, I want to boot it up again as it's a very neat game, and I like the idea of permanent deaths. It's a mechanic that is becoming more popular with sandbox survival games. I see this trend becoming widely adopted in the next few years. Hopefully it won't turn into the fiasco that was "quick time events," and become a feature that is just shoehorned into games without much thought or reasoning.

Great submission, Tyrranis. The way you described how your troopers pulled off those feats would make it that much more disheartening if/when you lost them. It certainly makes for a very suspenseful atmosphere, and I would be much more apprehensive with a character that managed to survive several battles and become a formidable opponent to the aliens. I was actually hoping for more replies like yours. I think I just chose the wrong words in my original post and it came across as a "who's your favorite character" topic.

On the subject of Kratos:
I have no qualms with Nathan Drake being a more likable character than Kratos, but I wonder who has made a more lasting impression. Both are admirable characters within their own rights. In ancient Greek mythology, humans are traditionally 'toys' in which the gods use to entertain themselves. They're often exploited unwillingly, and with that in mind, they are merely a catalyst for said god to pursue its own agenda.

*SPOILERS*On the brink of death, Kratos summons Ares for resurrection, but is perhaps blinded to the repercussions associated in dealing with a god. I feel Kratos was a victim of Ares' exploits and was tricked into killing his family, and was also forced to obliterate Athens; the city he died protecting. Actually, I cannot remember whether he died protecting Athens or from conquests in efforts to expand his kingdom. His initial plea for resurrection is probably one of selfish matters: vengeance on the barbarian king from whom he and his soldiers had been slayed. Either way, by the end of the first game, Kratos becomes so overwhelmed by these tragic events, he plunges himself into the Aegean Sea in an attempted suicide. He would have succeeded if not for divine intervention.

END OF SPOILERS

I see the original story of Kratos being one of humanity's revenge on the gods. It's hard not to, at the very least, feel empathy for a person who suffered his particular kind of hell. Regardless, he's definitely an "outstanding character," making a lasting impression on enough people to warrant many sequels and become a household name.